Financing the Response to AIDS in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: International Assistance From Donor Governments in 2010

Presents 2010 data on international AIDS assistance from donor governments, including trends by donor country and funding channel, aid per $1 million GDP by country, and gaps between needs and resources and between commitments and disbursements

Donor Government Funding for HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in 2020

This report, Donor Government Funding for HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in 2020, tracks funding levels of the donor governments that collectively provide the bulk of international assistance for AIDS through bilateral programs and contributions to multilateral organizations. The new report, produced as a partnership between KFF and UNAIDS, provides the latest data available on donor funding disbursements based on data provided by governments. It includes their bilateral assistance to low- and middle-income countries and contributions to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria as well as UNITAID

Donor Government Funding for HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in 2022

This report, Donor Government Funding for HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in 2022, tracks funding levels of the donor governments that collectively provide the bulk of international assistance for AIDS through bilateral programs and contributions to multilateral organizations. The new report, produced as a partnership between KFF and UNAIDS, provides the latest data available on donor funding disbursements based on data provided by governments. It includes their bilateral assistance to low- and middle-income countries and contributions to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria as well as UNITAID

Mapping the Donor Landscape in Global Health: Tuberculosis

Which donors are working in which countries and on what issues? How can country recipients of aid best identify those donors? Are donor governments themselves adequately aware of one another's presence and efforts on identical issues? These questions reflect key challenges facing donors of international assistance, country recipients of assistance, civil society, and other stakeholders working in the development field, and highlight issues that can make it difficult to effectively negotiate, coordinate, and deliver programs. In the health sector such issues are particularly relevant given the proliferation in the number of donors providing health aid to low- and middle-income countries, and the amount of that aid during the last decade. Such issues carry a new significance in the current era of economic austerity, one that has led donors and recipients to seek more streamlined approaches to health assistance that achieve "value for money." To provide some perspective on the geographic presence of global health donors and to help stakeholders begin to answer some of the above questions, the Kaiser Family Foundation is undertaking a series of analyses to describe the global health "donor landscape." Using three years of data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), we map the geographic landscape of global health donor assistance, looking both at donor presence and magnitude of donor assistance by issue area, region, and country. The effort is intended to shed new light on donor presence within and across recipient countries, and to produce a set of figures and tools that stakeholders can use in both donor and recipient countries. From at least the early 2000s, there have been organized efforts to push for greater transparency and better coordination between donors, and between donors and recipients. These calls contributed to a series of international declarations on aid effectiveness such as the 2002 Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development and the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, in which donors and recipient nations agreed to adhere to a code of good practice and a set of principles that would guide and improve donor assistance. In part, the principles were designed to help alleviate some of the administrative burdens on countries from having multiple donors, and to increase the impact derived from donor funding. They have also, more recently, focused on the importance of donor transparency for increasing "country ownership" by recipients of aid; that is, a country-led response to designing and implementing development programs. In global health, uncoordinated donor activities can reduce efficiency and result in missed opportunities to leverage partnerships, streamline processes, and share experiences. While there have been several health-focused efforts aiming to improve donor coordination and donor transparency these challenges continue today and have gained new significance given the current economic environment.Indeed, with signs that donor assistance is flattening, there has been an even higher premium placed on improving coordination and leveraging existing funding and programs. This report focuses on international assistance for tuberculosis

Mapping the Donor Landscape in Global Health: Malaria

Which donors are working in which countries and on what issues? How can country recipients of aid best identify those donors? Are donor governments themselves adequately aware of one another's presence and efforts on identical issues? These questions reflect key challenges facing donors of international assistance, country recipients of assistance, civil society, and other stakeholders working in the development field, and highlight issues can make it difficult to effectively negotiate, coordinate, and deliver programs. In the health sector such issues are particularly relevant given the proliferation in the number of donors providing health aid to low and middle income countries, and the amount of that aid during the last decade. Such issues carry a new significance in the current era of economic austerity, one that has led donors and recipients to seek more streamlined approaches to health assistance that achieve "value for money." To provide some perspective on the geographic presence of global health donors and to help stakeholders begin to answer some of the above questions, the Kaiser Family Foundation is undertaking a series of analyses to describe the global health "donor landscape." Using three years of data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), we map the geographic landscape of global health donor assistance, looking both at donor presence and magnitude of donor assistance by issue area, region and country. The effort is intended to shed new light on donor presence within and across recipient countries, and to produce a set of figures and tools that stakeholders can use in both donor and recipient countries. From at least the early 2000s, there have been organized efforts to push for greater transparency and better coordination between donors, and between donors and recipients. These calls contributed to a series of international declarations on aid effectiveness such as the 2002 Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development and the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, in which donors and recipient nations agreed to adhere to a code of good practice and a set of principles that would guide and improve donor assistance. In part, the principles were designed to help alleviate some of the administrative burdens on countries from having multiple donors, and to increase the impact derived from donor fundingThey have also, more recently, focused on the importance of donor transparency for increasing "country ownership" by recipients of aid; that is, a country-led response to designing and implementing development programs. In global health, uncoordinated donor activities can reduce efficiency and result in missed opportunities to leverage partnerships, streamline processes, and share experiences. While there have been several health-focused efforts aiming to improve donor coordination and donor transparency these challenges continue today and have gained new significance given the current economic environment. Indeed, with signs that donor assistance is flattening, there has been an even higher premium placed on improving coordination and leveraging existing funding and programs. This report focuses on international assistance for malaria

Mapping The Donor Landscape in Global Health: HIV/AIDS

This report maps the complex network of international assistance aimed at addressing the global impact of HIV/AIDS. The analysis identifies 37 different donors, comprising 26 nations providing bi-lateral support and 11 multilateral programs, providing assistance to 143 recipient countries over a three-year period through 2011. Key findings include:The U.S. provides almost two-thirds of all HIV/AIDS international assistance. The next largest donor, the Global Fund, provides one fifth of all assistance. Together they account for an average of 80 percent global HIV/AIDS assistance.On average, 10 donors were present in each recipient country. Fourteen recipient countries had more than 20 donors present during the three-year period: Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Rwanda, South Africa, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia, India, Burkina Faso and Mali.The biggest donor varies by region, with the United States providing the largest share of assistance in sub-Saharan Africa and North & Central America; the Global Fund providing the largest share in Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, South and Central Asia, South America and Far East Asia; and Australia providing the largest share in Oceania

Donor Funding for Health in Low- & Middle-Income Countries, 2001-2008

Analyzes trends in funding and development assistance from governments and multilateral institutions, with a focus on health, including water and sanitation activities. Provides data by assistance type, donor, region, health sub-sector, and activity

Possibilities for Groundwater Flow Sensing with Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors

An understanding of groundwater flow near drinking water extraction wells is crucial when it comes to avoiding well clogging and pollution. A promising new approach to groundwater flow monitoring is the deployment of a network of optical fibers with fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors. In preparation for a field experiment, a laboratory scale aquifer was constructed to investigate the feasibility of FBG sensors for this application. Multiparameter FBG sensors were able to detect changes in temperature, pressure, and fiber shape with sensitivities influenced by the packaging. The first results showed that, in a simulated environment with a flow velocity of 2.9 m/d, FBG strain effects were more pronounced than initially expected. FBG sensors of a pressure-induced strain implemented in a spatial array could form a multiplexed sensor for the groundwater flow direction and magnitude. Within the scope of this research, key technical specifications of FBG interrogators for groundwater flow sensing were also identified

Dynamic consolidation measurements in a well field using fiber bragg grating sensors

Currently available groundwater flow prediction tools and methods are limited by insufficient spatial resolution of subsurface data and the unknown local heterogeneity. In this field study, fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors were installed in an extraction well field to investigate its potential to measure groundwater flow velocity. Reference in-situ pore pressure and temperature measurements were used to identify possible sources of FBG responses. FBG strain sensors were able to detect soil consolidation caused by groundwater extraction from 250 m distance. The results show that FBG responses were influenced by interface friction between soil and FBG packaging. FBG packaging slipped in soil and the effect was more pronounced during higher groundwater flow around a nearby well. These FBG fibers could be applied for indirect flow monitoring that does not require any tracer and provide real-time and long-term data during regular operation of extraction wells